This is part of Outreach’s series of articles on the Study Group 9 report.
In tune with the season of spring bursting with new life, the Vatican recently released a document entitled “Theological criteria and synodal methodologies for shared discernment of emerging doctrinal, pastoral, and ethical issues.” It reports the recommendations of Study Group 9, which was charged with considering tense issues that emerged during the Synod of Bishops several years prior. Every word of the title vibrates with meaning, for the report advocates settling issues by listening, dialoguing and discerning together as baptized persons led by the Spirit, rather than by an older model of applying abstract moral principles to actual human lives.
The experience of the LGBTQ Catholic community offers a case in point. In keeping with its pastoral call to listen and dialogue, the document cites the stories of two gay men who describe their experiences of suffering and hope. As James Martin, SJ, has rightly pointed out, including these stories marks a significant step forward in the church’s relationship with the LGBTQ community. It is disappointing that women’s experiences are not also cited, an omission that reinforces the traditional pattern of silencing women’s voices in the church. But still, a step is a step. A further step comes as the report lays out ongoing ways to deal with the impasse between good pastoral practice and current doctrine that defines homosexuality as an “objective disorder” (which, it must be said, is not infallible and is therefore subject to development: remember geocentric theory; remember slavery).
The theological frame for the entire discussion is the dramatic story recounted in the biblical Acts of the Apostles chapters 10-15. These chapters narrate a turning point of enormous importance in the early church. Members of the original community of disciples following Jesus, adhered faithfully to the Jewish tradition without envisioning another alternative. As their preaching attracted gentiles, however, the burning question arose of whether newly baptized gentiles had to observe the Mosaic law. A key issue was male circumcision, a sacred sign of the covenant from Abraham onward. Jesus was circumcised, as were Peter and the original band of men disciples, as was Paul. No wonder certain members of the early community insisted that men wishing to join them should be circumcised. This had more than cultural and anthropological meaning. It was a profound act of religious identity in relation to God.
Baptized LGBTQ persons are members of the body of Christ, are other Christs. The Spirit working in them bestows the same gifts as in other baptized persons.
The story pivots around how the early church came to recognize a wider divine call through the action of the Holy Spirit in others different from themselves. Consider crucial texts relevant for our own day.
First, while traveling, Peter has a dream about animals, both clean and unclean according to the law of Moses. Faithful to the Law, he refuses the invitation to eat them all. Then a voice from heaven says, “What God has made clean, you must not call profane” (10:15).
Next, a gentile named Cornelius sends for Peter to come to his household. Reluctantly making the connection between animals and people, Peter complies, saying, “You yourselves know that it is improper for a Jew to associate with or to visit an outsider, but God has shown me that I should not call anyone profane or unclean” (10:28).
After Peter preaches to Cornelius’ circle about Jesus, crucified and risen. “[T]he Holy Spirit fell upon all who heard the word. The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astounded that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the gentiles, for they heard them speaking in tongues and extolling God. Then Peter said, ‘Can anyone withhold the water for baptizing these people who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?’” (10:44-47).
Leaving the nucleus of a new Christian community in Cornelius’ house, Peter returns to Jerusalem where he is roundly criticized for baptizing without first requiring circumcision. His response is telling: “If God gave them the same gift that he gave us when we believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could hinder God?” (11:17). Notice the reasoning. Imagine the courage it took to think outside the box this way.
The issue stirs to life again when some law-abiding men travel to interrupt the successful ministry of Paul and Barnabas among the gentiles, teaching, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved” (15:1). A pivotal meeting is called in Jerusalem to settle the matter once and for all. After much debate, Peter speaks: “God, who knows the human heart, testified to them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as he did to us, and in cleansing their hearts by faith he has made no distinction between them and us. Now, therefore, why are you putting God to the test…? On the contrary, we believe that we will be saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, just as they will.” (15:8-11).
As with inter-church relations, so too with intra-church conflicts. Discerning the same Spirit at work in others who differ leads to affirming them in a unity that encompasses diversity.
This leads to the famous letter to gentile believers where the elders and apostles write: “it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us” not to impose the burden of circumcision (15:28), though they should refrain from meat sacrificed to idols and certain other practices.
As the Vatican report muses, this circumcision question keeps on arising in different forms throughout the church’s history. The vital issue then was “whether and how two different forms of the experience of faith in Jesus could coexist.” Resolution came only after dissension and debate when, with eyes of faith wide open, people recognized the same Spirit at work in others who differed in critical ways from themselves … and made room for them to live without conforming to a venerable sacred practice.
Recognizing the same Spirit at work is key.
In our day, both philosophy and theology are robustly developing the idea of recognition. It plays a critical role in ecumenical relations. One Roman Catholic-Lutheran document identifies recognition as “a theological and spiritual affirmation of the other church in its special emphases,” because the churches can see that in, through and beyond differences the same faith in Christ is being lived out. As with inter-church relations, so too with intra-church conflicts. Discerning the same Spirit at work in others who differ leads to affirming them in a unity that encompasses diversity.
Back to the LGBTQ community. The ritual of words and water in the sacrament of baptism takes place the same way regardless of gender, sexual orientation, race, or other particular human markers. The result is the same. Baptized LGBTQ persons are members of the body of Christ, are other Christs. The Spirit working in them bestows the same gifts as in other baptized persons. This may not be speaking in tongues, but as Paul described: “the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control” (Gal 5:22-23).
The invitation and challenge to the whole church now, existing in individuals, communities, and institution, is to recognize the presence and action of the Holy Spirit in the lives of LGBTQ persons and to affirm them as equal, cherished members of the community. For “God gave them the same gift.”
